EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Case management
Postponement or stay (refusal of adjournment)
The Claimant submitted medical evidence to the effect that he was unfit to attend the hearing of his claim by reason of a respiratory infection. The Tribunal refused his application for an adjournment and proceeded to hear the claim without his participation.
Held: the Tribunal’s refusal of an adjournment was wrong in law. Teinaz v London Borough of Wandsworth [2002] IRLR 721, Andreou v Lord Chancellor’s Department [2002] IRLR 728, Terluk v Berezovsky [2010] EWCA Civ 1345 (25 Nov 2010) and Osborn and Booth v Parole Board [2010] EWCA Civ 1409 discussed.
Richardson J
[2011] UKEAT 0247 – 11 – 1301
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Dr Y R Teinaz v Wandsworth Borough Council CA 16-Jul-2001
The applicant had made a claim to the tribunal, but then applied for an adjournment on medical grounds, submitting a medical certificate.
Held: Where a refusal to exercise a discretion could lead to the loss of significant rights, a court . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – O’Cathail v Transport for London CA 20-Jul-2012
The court was asked about the power of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) to extend time for appealing from the Employment Tribunal (ET). . .
Appeal from – Transport for London v O’Cathail CA 29-Jan-2013
The court considered an appeal against a refusal of a late application for an adjournment by an employment tribunal.
Held: The appeal was allowed. There had been no error of law in the decisions of the ET to refuse adjournments either in its . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Employment
Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.450258
